Myers Depot Metal Detectors

New in NE Kansas

T

thedrane

New Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2017
Messages
4
Location
Topeka KS
I'm located north of Topeka just getting into the hobby. I have a white coinmaster 6000 series 2 looking for places to hunt, and I have a lot of questions about laws, especially waterways IE Kansas river. Any help would be great.
 
Welcome from Dodge City

Kansas has no metal detecting laws. Federals laws apply such as being illegal to hunt state property (state lakes/state parks). Other than that you're pretty free to hunt any public land including the parking strips in front of most houses. When in doubt, get permission.

Never feel you have a disadvantage living in a newer state like Kansas. I have found coins are far back as 137 AD. Spanish Reales and US coins back to the 1830's.
 
The drane: welcome to FMDF. The 6000 D series II is circa 1981-ish. Great machine for its era. Still ok for casual hunting, although today's machines go deeper, add TID, see through & around iron better (ie.: better amidst masking). But still ok for casual use.

Detector said:
.... Kansas has no metal detecting laws. Federals laws apply such as being illegal to hunt state property (state lakes/state parks).
Click to expand...

Kansas state parks and law has no mention of md'ing. Ie.: Silent on the subject. Hence not prohibited. How do you figure that federal laws apply to state land ? Federal laws do no subrogate down to state (nor county nor city). Federal laws would only apply to federal land. Not other forms of land.
 
Tom_in_CA said:
The drane: welcome to FMDF. The 6000 D series II is circa 1981-ish. Great machine for its era. Still ok for casual hunting, although today's machines go deeper, add TID, see through & around iron better (ie.: better amidst masking). But still ok for casual use.



Kansas state parks and law has no mention of md'ing. Ie.: Silent on the subject. Hence not prohibited. How do you figure that federal laws apply to state land ? Federal laws do no subrogate down to state (nor county nor city). Federal laws would only apply to federal land. Not other forms of land.
Click to expand...

I've already had a friend run off from Horse Thief lake, state lake, and people run off from another state lake, which name escapes me right now, and quoted as being state property controlled so they fall under federal laws, and the federal laws says no metal detecting on state property.

Actually, if you want to get technical, you can be charged with a felony for detecting anywhere but private property. Even public property, if they really want to push it, can be off limits. If there is no state law federal law still applies. ONLY if they have a state law does the federal laws not apply.

it's a felony. ... Federal law prohibits the possession and use of metal detectors on federal property. In addition to metal detecting, federal law also prohibits relic hunting, digging for artifacts, and removing artifacts or historical objects.
Click to expand...
Also just FYI-
The law that applies to situations where state and federal laws disagree is called the supremacy clause, which is part of article VI of the Constitution. The supremacy clause contains what's known as the doctrine of pre-emption, which says that the federal government wins in the case of conflicting legislation.

A metal detector user may be in violation of the law if artifacts are recovered during metal detecting, or if archaeological sites are disturbed during metal detecting activities. Artifacts and archaeological sites on federal, state, and local jurisdiction-controlled properties are protected by law. Archaeological resources on private property are also safeguarded by law (e.g., trespassing).

Violation of these laws carries serious consequences including the possibility of fines, jail time, and confiscation of the metal detector and other equipment used in the violation (such as vehicles). Other laws may apply including theft, destruction of private or government property, vandalism, and driving in prohibited areas.
Click to expand...
Sooooo.... Technically, federal detecting laws can be applied in any state.
 
Last edited:
Detector said:
I've already had a friend run off from Horse Thief lake, state lake, and people run off from another state lake, which name escapes me right now, and quoted as being state property controlled so they fall under federal laws, and the federal laws says no metal detecting on state property.

Actually, if you want to get technical, you can be charged with a felony for detecting anywhere but private property. Even public property, if they really want to push it, can be off limits. If there is no state law federal law still applies. ONLY if they have a state law does the federal laws not apply.

Also just FYI- Sooooo.... Technically, federal detecting laws can be applied in any state.
Click to expand...

Detector, interesting topic. The fact of getting run off a state park, and someone telling you "because of federal statutes" (arpa, etc...) is simply someone's "go-to" reason for telling you "scram". It doesn't mean that the person telling you this was correct in thinking that ARPA automatically subrogates down to lower level entities.

They could also tell you "scram" because they feel that your action violates "harvest and remove" verbiage. Or "alter and deface" verbiage. Or "disturbing earthworms", etc... The mere fact that someone has ever received a "scram" from a place does not, in my mind, make it "law". They can be flukes by over-zealous rangers. Or perhaps the md'r in question was snooping around obvious sensitive monuments. And sure, whenever someone gets a "scram", it will be propped up by some dire sounding thing they cite that they *think* applies.

I can give you scores of examples of this psychology, where something like the examples you give arise, yet they are isolated flukes and md'ing goes on all the time.

And it's just counter-intuitive anyhow, to think that the larger entities laws subrogate down to lower sub-entities anyhow. Because if this succession is true, then ... I suppose each county park could say they are subject to state park laws (since counties are a sub-entity of the states, right ?) . And each city park could say that they are beholden to the county or state or federal too, right ? (since cities are a sub-entity of the larger entities).

But this isn't the way it works. Laws and rules vary from park to park, entity to entity ALL THE TIME. Eg.: one allows dogs on leash, the other allows them off-leash. One closes at sunset, the other allows camping. One has off-roading, the other forbids off-road. Etc.. etc...

And let's be perfectly clear: There's not a speck of public land ANYWHERE, that if a person stood on one foot, squinted hard, that you can find verbiage said to dis-allow md'ing. Yet a quick look at the finds forums shows no shortage of people detecting (gasp) public land. Parks, forests, beaches, etc.... Why isn't arpa subrogating down to these places ?
 
There was an interesting thread on this line-of-reasoning that came up a few years ago. Someone had posted a scary article, by purist archies in Kentucky, where the archies had scolded someone from digging on a city school yard. And the reason ? The archies were saying that all land is subject to Arpa. Yup, not only reaching down to state level, but also, by succession, county and city lands ! I kid you not !

Some Kentucky md'rs were understandibly getting riled up about this. And a full legal look at this logic un-folded in that thread. And by the time it was done: it was an un-founded fear. And lo & behold, I betcha there's md'rs in Kentucky that (gasp) detect on public land and (gasp) find coins older than 50 yrs. old. So too would the logic apply to Kansas as well.

Might there be some purist archie that disagrees ? Sure ! Let them pound sand (they probably never leave their desk in state capital anyhow). Might there be some fluke by an over zealous cop or gardener to scrammed someone ? SURE ! Avoid that one person and go at a different time. Presto, problem solved.
 
go-to" reason for telling you "scram
Click to expand...
Exactly, but it was a state ranger and the guy didn't think it wise to argue LOL.

Really most don't have a problem with metal detecting most places. It's just that if you run into the wrong one they can cause you some problem's. That is why I never argue even if I think I'm right.
 
Detector said:
Exactly, but it was a state ranger and the guy didn't think it wise to argue LOL.

Really most don't have a problem with metal detecting most places. It's just that if you run into the wrong one they can cause you some problem's. That is why I never argue even if I think I'm right.
Click to expand...

Correct. You give "lip service" and move on. And avoid that one person or one park in the future. But I think we agree that it doesn't constitute "gospel law" . Nor wise to try to dis-prove them (lest you/we open up a bigger can of worms).

As an example: There's even been a few scrams (accompanied by dire sounding verbiage) for state of CA beaches. Yet they've all turned out to be isolated flukes. And to this day, you can hunt state of CA beaches till you're blue in the face. I suppose if we all went to Sacramento "seeking clarification" and peppering it with words like 'artifact' and 'take/remove' and 'dig' and 'indian bone' that we might indeed get an edict. The moral of the story ?: Don't ask silly questions :cool:
 
A lot of good info. I think I'm going to steer clear of state and federal ground. I would really like to know about waterways specifically the Kansas river and small creeks. I believe that between high water lines it is legal but I don't know for sure. Anyone have any clarification?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rudy
Magnet Fishing Yields New Evidence
Replies
2
Views
72
cellrdwellr
cellrdwellr
maxxkatt
Fun comparison of our members with the members of the Danbury Metal Detecting Club
Replies
5
Views
127
CountyWorker
CountyWorker
GTimberMT
Short story about pull tabs! You never know!!
Replies
0
Views
108
GTimberMT
GTimberMT
60streeter
FAVORITE TIME OF YEAR
Replies
4
Views
107
cellrdwellr
cellrdwellr
C
My new display case
2
Replies
21
Views
272
maxxkatt
maxxkatt
Back
Top Bottom